Subtle Intelligence Tests Examined

​G.D.O’Bradovich III

February 10, 2017​

​In the essay, “Is Shakespeare Dead?”, Mark Twain suggests that Shakespeare's plays subtly betray an intimate knowledge of the law, legal reasoning and procedures. We presume that anyone with this specific legal knowledge would recognize these items in the plays. Of all the potential readers, only a few would both recognize the legalisms and reach the conclusion that the author’s profession was in court, not the stage. To openly suggest an idea that contravenes conventional wisdom demonstrates fortitude.

We suggest that philosophical writings utilise terms and concepts that only fellow philosophers would recognize. To the best of our knowledge, this potentially has never appeared in print.

We suggest that ancient philosophical writings are a type of an intelligence test. Modern texts are too explicit to qualify as esoteric writing. The cautious nature of Fred is an exception. Of course, he was a philologist.

Formerly, intelligence was considered monolithic, however, today professionals recognize several types of intelligence, such as interpersonal, musical, and athletic.

We offer two points as evidence for our proposition that certain texts are a type of intelligence examination. Firstly, utilizing esoteric writing techniques, such as contradictions and inexact repetition, affect neither the careless reader nor an understanding of the text. Secondly, the topics found are not of a readily understandable nature, thereby creating additional difficulties. Perhaps the alleged writings of the Church Fathers are the best examples of the combination of esoteric writing and difficult subject matter.

Tertullian’s “On the Soul” is an excellent example both of tedious writing and esoteric writing. While the express, or implied, purpose of the work is support the concept of the immortal soul, the writer repeatedly makes statements that the careful reader will question, resulting in doubting the likelihood of the immortal soul. Few readers will openly impugn the integrity of a Church Father by suggesting that the writer implicitly denies, or questions, a dogma of the western church. We suggest that this book on the soul is more recent than is suspected by theologians, as the dogma of the immortal soul only dates from the year 1517. While it is possible this work antedates the Lateran Council, its denial of the immortal soul is strong evidence of a later date.

Esoteric working, like legal reasoning, is replete with conditional phrasing. “If/then”, “either/or”, and liberal use of clauses may be confusing to most, or casual, readers. The difficulty of comprehending the text can be increased by utilizing words such as “may”, “seem”, “certain”, “possible”, and “potential”. The use of ambiguous words such as “faith”, “belief”, “we”, and even “Christian”, create additional uncertainty for the average reader without opinions. Discussions on topics that are not found in nature, such as theology and politics, will create additional uncertainty. Careless readers will have incorrect opinions of the law and of theology. In conclusion to this part, discussions of human constructs, with difficult phrasing, and usage of esoteric writing, result in texts that few readers will fully comprehend.

It seems that for all of potential philosophical writer’s insights into the human condition, sexual drive and desires are not adequately understood, or the motivation is alien to these individuals.

What is the value of sexual intercourse when compared to engaging and stimulating conversation?

Since reason is man's highest ability, not reproduction, we can understand philosopher’s disdain for this activity, if only because it is dependant upon another, unlike, thinking and eating. We suggest that these “oddities” of behavior of future philosophers may be observed in their youth, that is, they do not conform to expected normal behavior. For all their natural insights, reason, and values, our future philosophers, the little professors, can not have experiences beyond their ignorance and limited life experiences: conventional gender roles.

The Gentle Researcher will conclude that certain individuals, at an early age, will understand that they are different from their peers, yet they will not understand the reason for this divergence from their cohort. These individuals are naturally cautious and, possessing a superior intellect, can mimic, to varying degrees of success, their peers. We may say that that sexual desire is almost unknown to these philosophical individuals; but, if known, then strictly relegated, and restricted by caution, and by reason.

Philosophical and esoteric writings have writing styles and wording with the intention of being recognized by those with identical qualities. It seems that these authors only value the minds of equals, that is, those readers who can pass these always tedious, but worthwhile, intelligence examinations. If the reader only understands frequent repetitions of moral teachings and the promotion of virtue, then the work will be preserved, promoted, and pass to another generation.

As most readers can only comprehend simple moral teachings, we expect these individuals to believe they completely understand the text. The result of their incorrect opinion will be endless moralizing and criticizing certain behaviours. As Saint Paul observed, there must be heresies to demonstrate those who correctly understand. Therefore, these exoteric writings carry esoteric teachings into the future.

The authors of the alleged writings of the church Fathers are anonymous. Hardouin suggested that impiety is more important than fame for these synonymous writers. We do not know if Hardouin’s opinion about impiety being more of a motivator than renown is correct. However, if certain readers suggest a lawyer wrote Shakespeare’s, and can make reasonable conclusions about the author, then other readers may suggest viable authors for the writings of the Church Fathers.

Explicit references to certain groups, or concepts, may be a type of misdirection, the descriptions and characteristics may be applicable to another group. For instance, if an author discusses topics such as the Occult, philosophy, and Christianity in the same work, but does not explicitly define these terms and allows the reader to supply the definitions, then confusion may result. We suggest that these words may be substituted for one another, especially if the author praises one, and condemns another, to possibly discover the author’s esoteric views on these topics. Of course, word substitutions, whether random or not, may unnecessarily confuse the typical reader. Hence, incorrectly deciphered esoteric writing techniques will lead to improper conclusions.

“The first rule of bureaucracy is self preservation.”

Nature teaches a hierarchy where, in the common understanding, “might is right”; strength dominates weakness. Certain philosophical writers recognize nature's lesson, but being men, write to other men. The motive for writing to select individuals is love: the recognition of the highest virtue, reason, and the highest qualities, curiosity and intelligence.

In consideration of assistance provided to a renowned Master of the Occult Arts and Sciences, it is hereby proclaimed, and declared, that Joe be dutifully recognized as an Assistant to an Apprentice.